Patel (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) considered an application by Mr. Patel for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Temporary Residence Transition stream of the Subclass 186 visa. The delegate had refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet criterion 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which requires the nominated position to be the subject of an approved nomination. The applicant sought review of this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This criterion, in essence, mandates that the position for which the visa is sought must be the subject of an approved nomination by the prospective employer, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not attend the hearing. In the absence of further evidence from the applicant, the Tribunal was unable to be satisfied that the applicant was the subject of an approved nomination as required by cl.186.223. Consequently, the Tribunal was compelled to affirm the delegate's decision. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas.